Shining the "Light" on Moral Foundations: Light Versus Dark Personality Relates More Strongly to Moral Foundations.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychological Reports Pub Date : 2024-07-24 DOI:10.1177/00332941241264786
William Hart, Danielle E Wahlers, Charlotte K Cease, Joshua T Lambert, Peter Castagna
{"title":"Shining the \"Light\" on Moral Foundations: Light Versus Dark Personality Relates More Strongly to Moral Foundations.","authors":"William Hart, Danielle E Wahlers, Charlotte K Cease, Joshua T Lambert, Peter Castagna","doi":"10.1177/00332941241264786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Endorsement of the moral foundations specified by Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) can sometimes fail to relate negatively to certain dispositions indicative of bad moral character. This evidence has fueled some concerns over whether the moral foundations in MFT are \"moral.\" To increase understanding of how moral foundations relate to moral character, we proposed the \"asymmetry hypothesis.\" This hypothesis states that \"good\" character is a more powerful predictor of each moral foundation than \"bad\" character. Put differently, there is an asymmetry in the strength (not merely direction) with which the moral foundations relate to encompassing indicators of good versus bad character. This is important because it suggests that links between the moral foundations and moral character will be somewhat concealed by focusing on bad character and/or not considering encompassing indicators of good character. A sample of college participants (<i>N</i> = 514) rated their endorsement of moral foundations and completed two sets of measures that represented encompassing indicators of both good and bad character. The data supported the asymmetry hypothesis: Each encompassing good-character assessment was a stronger predictor of each moral foundation than its corresponding encompassing bad-character assessment. Furthermore, variance unique to any good-character assessment had about moderate relations with each moral foundation, but variance unique to any bad-character assessment had no more than small relations with each moral foundation. The study provides a more nuanced understanding of how moral character relates to moral foundations and highlights utility in considering moral character as multidimensional.</p>","PeriodicalId":21149,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Reports","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241264786","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Endorsement of the moral foundations specified by Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) can sometimes fail to relate negatively to certain dispositions indicative of bad moral character. This evidence has fueled some concerns over whether the moral foundations in MFT are "moral." To increase understanding of how moral foundations relate to moral character, we proposed the "asymmetry hypothesis." This hypothesis states that "good" character is a more powerful predictor of each moral foundation than "bad" character. Put differently, there is an asymmetry in the strength (not merely direction) with which the moral foundations relate to encompassing indicators of good versus bad character. This is important because it suggests that links between the moral foundations and moral character will be somewhat concealed by focusing on bad character and/or not considering encompassing indicators of good character. A sample of college participants (N = 514) rated their endorsement of moral foundations and completed two sets of measures that represented encompassing indicators of both good and bad character. The data supported the asymmetry hypothesis: Each encompassing good-character assessment was a stronger predictor of each moral foundation than its corresponding encompassing bad-character assessment. Furthermore, variance unique to any good-character assessment had about moderate relations with each moral foundation, but variance unique to any bad-character assessment had no more than small relations with each moral foundation. The study provides a more nuanced understanding of how moral character relates to moral foundations and highlights utility in considering moral character as multidimensional.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
照亮道德基础之 "光":光明人格与黑暗人格与道德基础的关系更密切。
对道德基础理论(Moral Foundations Theory,MFT)所规定的道德基础的认可,有时会与某些表明道德品行不良的倾向产生负相关。这一证据加剧了人们对道德基础理论中的道德基础是否 "道德 "的担忧。为了进一步了解道德基础与道德品质之间的关系,我们提出了 "不对称假说"。该假说认为,"好 "品格比 "坏 "品格更能预测每种道德基础。换句话说,道德基础与好品格和坏品格的综合指标之间的关联强度(而不仅仅是方向)是不对称的。这一点很重要,因为它表明,如果只关注坏品格和/或不考虑好品格的综合指标,就会在一定程度上掩盖道德基础与道德品格之间的联系。一个大学生参与者样本(N = 514)对他们对道德基础的认可度进行了评分,并完成了两套代表好品格和坏品格的综合指标的测量。数据支持不对称假设:与相应的品德不良指标相比,每个品德良好指标对每个品德基础的预测作用都更强。此外,任何良好品格评估所独有的变异与每个道德基础都有中等程度的关系,但任何不良品格评估所独有的变异与每个道德基础的关系都很小。这项研究让我们对道德品质与道德基础之间的关系有了更细致的了解,并强调了将道德品质视为多维度的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Reports
Psychological Reports PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
171
期刊最新文献
"Alexithymia, Cognitive Distortion and internet Addiction: Moderating Role of Emotional Intelligence". The Development and Preliminary Validity and Reliability of Self-Disclosure to Romantic Partner (SDRP) Scale. Phubbing Makes the Heart Grow Callous: Effects of Phubbing on Pro-social Behavioral Intentions, Empathy and Self-Control. A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of COVID-19 on Optimism Prediction. Should Adolescents Listen to Their Hearts? A Closer Look at the Associations Between Interoception, Emotional Awareness and Emotion Regulation in Adolescents.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1